Visitor Counter

Visitors Since Blog Created in March 2010

Click Below to:

Add Blog to Favorites

Coyotes-Wolves-Cougars.blogspot.com

Grizzly bears, black bears, wolves, coyotes, cougars/ mountain lions,bobcats, wolverines, lynx, foxes, fishers and martens are the suite of carnivores that originally inhabited North America after the Pleistocene extinctions.
This site invites research, commentary, point/counterpoint on that suite of native animals (predator and prey) that inhabited The Americas circa 1500-at the initial point of European exploration and subsequent colonization.
Landscape ecology, journal accounts of explorers and frontiersmen, genetic evaluations of museum animals, peer reviewed 20th and 21st century research on various aspects of our "Wild America" as well as subjective commentary from expert and layman alike. All of the above being revealed and discussed with the underlying goal of one day seeing our Continent rewilded.....Where big enough swaths of open space exist with connective corridors to other large forest, meadow, mountain, valley, prairie, desert and chaparral wildlands.....Thereby enabling all of our historic fauna, including man, to live in a sustainable and healthy environment. - Blogger Rick

I hope you are well. My Arctic field expedition got rescheduled for two weeks from now (the ship had engine failure), so I am around during the first half of August, working on things. Here is the link to my most recent Island Press Field Notes blog post, please share with your readers.

RESILIENCE AND CARNIVORE SURVIVAL IN THE MATRIX

Wolverine taking the bait at a DNA study hair snare to study connectivity within the matrix in Banff. Photo by Anthony Clevenger, Banff National Park. Used with permission.

Ecological resilience has great bearing on carnivore conservation. In the 1970s, ecologist C. S. (a.k.a. “Buzz”) Holling first defined resilience as the ability of ecosystems to absorb disturbance and still persist in their basic structure and function. With regard to the large carnivores (or any species), ecologists measure resilience by looking at how connected their populations are. They measured resilience via population connectivity, because of the importance of genetics to the health and vigor of populations.

Why is resilience so important? Climate change, widely evident worldwide, will increase habitat fragmentation and shift plant community ranges. Today winters are measurably shorter than thirty years ago, the glaciers disappearing apace. Snow-dependent species like the wolverine (Gulo gulo) will be hit hardest by climate change as they find their habitat shrinking to the highest peaks. Carnivore ecologist John Weaver says, “Nowadays, climate change has put such an exclamation mark on Holling’s breakthrough concept about the importance of resilience. The question is how are these animals going to sustain their resiliency into a very different future? Big, intact, well-connected landscapes offer the best opportunity for animals to move and find their new ‘normal’ in terms of environmental conditions.”

To apply the concept of resilience, corridor ecologists such as Jodi Hilty begin by defining populations at three nested levels. At the smallest scale we find the individualorganism, and at the next scale the local population, also called a deme. At the largest scale lies the metapopulation, also known as a “population of populations.” The space between local populations is the matrix. Resilience accrues from the above three population levels and an organism’s ability to move well within the matrix.

Grizzly bear and cubs using wildlife overpass in Banff National Park, demonstrating connectivity within the matrix. Photo by Anthony Clevenger, Banff National Park. Used with permission.

Using grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in Banff National Park as an example, a female grizzly is the individual. A female with cubs plus two or three other bears that inhabit the same small valley in the park make up the local population. All the bears in Banff historically formed one population, but the Trans Canada Highway (Highway 1) and related human development has fractured it into two or more populations and diminished the natural movements and exchange of animals and their genes. To ensure genetic connectivity and that species don’t become extinct (called persistence), we need connectivity between populations within a metapopulation. This means having a permeable matrix.

Weaver took a close look at large carnivore resilience in North America, working at the three scales described above. He assessed individual resilience based on the capacity of an individual to switch between foods or habitats should one of these factors decline. He evaluated local population resilience based on mortality rates, which include stochastic (unpredictable) events, such as climate fluctuations and disease. At the metapopulation level, he evaluated resilience based on effective dispersal of young animals—which had to do with connectivity of travel corridors. He added two more dimensions to this resiliency framework: sensitivity to human disturbance and response to climate change.

Taking the above into consideration, he found that some species, such as the wolf (Canis lupus), which has a high reproductive rate and high survival of its young, are far more resilient than others, such as the wolverine, which has a low reproductive rate and low survival of its young. Some species are less resilient because they have very narrow habitat and food needs and are poor hunters. For example, lynx (Lynx Canadensis) can only survive by eating snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus) and are such poor hunters that they frequently starve to death.

To ensure persistence of large carnivores in an increasingly hotter, more fragmented world, we need to ensure connectivity of metapopulations over very long distances and even international boundaries, such as between grizzly bears in Banff and those in Glacier National Park. This calls for maintaining a permeable matrix. But further, we need to consider resilience when creating endangered species recovery plans.

Dr. Cristina Eisenberg is a conservation biologist at Oregon State University, a Smithsonian Research Associate, and a Boone and Crockett Fellow who studies how wolves affect forest ecosystems throughout the West. She is the author of The Wolf's Tooth and the new book The Carnivore Way.

ODNR Division of Wildlife biologists verified 200 bobcat sightings in Ohio in 2013. This is the fourth consecutive year more than 100 verified sightings were recognized in Ohio, and the first time sightings increased to 200.• Of the 200 verified sightings, 113 were recognized from photographs or videos. Additional sightings were verified through road kills, incidentally trapped animals (then released) and sightings by qualified personnel.

• Noble County continues to have the most verified sightings, with 32. An additional 106 sightings were confirmed in the counties immediately surrounding Noble (Guernsey, Belmont, Monroe, Washington, Morgan, and Muskingum).• Bobcats were confirmed in 36 counties during 2013, and have been verified in 49 counties since 1970.• The division collected an additional 226 unverified bobcat sightings in 2013. Most unverified sightings were reported through species observation cards. Unverified sightings have occurred in 86 of Ohio’s 88 counties since 1970.• Bobcats once roamed across Ohio, but they were extirpated around 1850 as more people settled within the state. A handful of unverified bobcat sightings in the 1960s announced the return of the species.• The bobcat was recently removed from the Ohio Endangered and Threatened Species List, but it remains protected in the state.

Biologists to extend grizzly bear research in Madison Range

GALLATIN COUNTY

U.S. Geological Survey bulletin

POSTED: 12:46 PM Jul 25 2014UPDATED: 2:47 PM Jul 25 2014

As part of ongoing efforts required under the Endangered Species Act to monitor the population of grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem, the U.S. Geological Survey, in conjunction with Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, is working to inform the public that pre-baiting and scientific trapping operations are ongoing within the Gravelly and Madison Ranges of Montana. Biologists, with the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST), began work in southwest Montana on June 21st and will continue trapping efforts through August 15th. Trapping operations can include a variety of activities, but all areas where work is being conducted will have major access points marked with warning signs. It is critical that all members of the public heed these signs.

Monitoring of grizzly bear distribution and other activities are vital to ongoing recovery of grizzlies in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. In order to attract bears, biologists utilize natural food sources such as fresh road-killed deer and elk. Potential trapping sites are baited with these natural foods and if indications are that grizzly bears are in the area, culvert traps or foot snares will be used to capture the bears. Once trapped, the bears are handled in accordance with strict protocols developed by the IGBST.

Whenever bear trapping activities are being conducted for scientific purposes, the area around the site will be posted with bright warning signs to inform the public of the activities occurring. These signs are posted along the major access points to the trapping site. It is important that the public heed these signs and do not venture into an area that has been posted. For more information regarding grizzly bear trapping efforts call the IGBST hotline at 406-994-6675.

Maine bear hunters set bait

for perhaps last time

Beginning Saturday, hunters can start luring bears by setting bait — typically, sugary high-calorie human food. But a November ballot question, if approved by voters, could prohibit hunting bears while using bait, dogs or traps. Hunting without the three methods, which supporters of the ban call "fair chase," would remain legal.

Supporters of the ban say bear baiting is cruel and habituates bears to humans. Opponents contend that a ban would wield a devastating blow to the state's tourism-dependent economy.

State Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife officials oppose the ban, saying bear hunting — and bear baiting — is necessary to manage the state's bear population. Daryl DeJoy, executive director of the Wildlife Alliance of Maine, says bear baiting has actually increased the state's bear population, which is about 30,000, a 30 percent increase from a decade ago.

"We're putting all these millions of pounds of junk food in the woods, sending these bears to sleep with a lot of high-calorie food, increasing their reproductive capabilities," DeJoy said.

The state's bear hunting season begins Aug. 25 and ends Nov. 29. Maine is the only state that allows all three of the hunting methods that the ban would eliminate. Baiting, which accounts for 80 percent of the state's bear hunt, must take place at least a quarter-mile from any dwellings.

Chad Deabay of Oxbow, owner of Oxbow Lodge and a bear hunt outfitter, says this year's bear season is attracting keen interest from hunters who are aware of the upcoming referendum. Meanwhile, hunting outfitters, he said, are in "panic mode" over the possibility of losing the use of bait — and the fear is shared by hotel owners, taxidermists and local restaurants, who all benefit from the influx of tourists. More than 1,700 of the 2,845 bears harvested in Maine in 2013 were caught by out-of-state residents.

"Some folks are coming this year because they're scared that they might not get to do it again," Deabay said.

The vote is coming in a year that has seen an increased amount of nuisance bear complaints from residents. An average year yields about 500 complaints of bears destroying property, stealing food or wandering close to a residential area, but this year's number is already 538, state officials said.

Whether the bears take the bait depends on the presence of natural food sources, said Jennifer Vashon, a state bear biologist. The availability of natural food appears moderate this year, she said. Bears tend to go after bait more aggressively when their natural food is scarce.

The vote will come 10 years after Maine voters narrowly rejected a similar measure
.

Jul. 26, 2014 |

The state Legislature has a
reputation for not just
cherry-picking battles,
but choosing winners
and losers, as well.
We still hold out hope,
however, that lawmakers
will do the right thing and
sit out the pitched battle
over the hunting of
wolves in the Upper Peninsula.

The Board of Canvassers
on Thursday unanimously
approved a third wolf petition
for the November election,
teeing up an opportunity for
lawmakers to nullify two
other proposals already on
the ballot.

The third ballot proposal
comes courtesy of Citizens
for Professional Wildlife
Management, which turned
in nearly 300,000 valid
signatures, easily
surpassing the required 258,088.

The Legislature has 40
days either to pass the
initiative, come up with
a competing proposal,
reject it, or do nothing.
This is one case in which
doing nothing, which our
Legislature has been
known to do on far more
pressing issues, is the only
decent alternative.

Were the Legislature to
pass the initiative — and
it’s already voted twice
in the past two years to
support a wolf hunt —
it automatically becomes
law. If they reject it or
do nothing, the initiative
will appear on the
November ballot along
with two other anti-wolf
hunting proposals
that have already been
approved for the ballot,
leaving the whole issue
up to voters.

We’re not big fans of
making policy through
ballot initiatives — a
blunt instrument that
rises and falls less on
substance or merit than
it does on emotion, and
few issues are more
emotional — and polarizing
— than the debate over
wolf management. Yet it’
s unseemly — and
undemocratic — for
an elected body to so
blatantly ignore the will
of its citizens, particularly
absent a compelling publi
c interest that might justify
taking an unpopular stand.

Strictly speaking, we do
not oppose the hunting
of gray wolves. Those who
do have legitimate objections
about the haste in which the
Legislature cleared the way
for A hunt, basing its decision
not on science but on the
discredited ravings of a few
zealots whom it seems would
like nothing better than to see
the gray wolf again disappear.

Neither are we impressed,
however, with anti-hunting
crowd’s vitriol toward those
they disparagingly refer to
as “trophy hunters,” as though
the only legitimate hunters
were those who did so for
sustenance and some
spiritual connection to
our lost wilderness.

Wildlife management
isn’t romantic nor, for
many, is hunting, but
hunters play an integral
role in the states’
management of the wild,
and those states, including
Michigan, have an excellent
track record of managing
other formerly rare species
such as deer, elk, mountain
lions and black bears. What's
more, wildlife management
experts and biologists
understand that wolves are
good for the ecosystem and
are highly motivated to see
the species succeed. So are we.

Forget hunting. A far greater
threat to the future of the gray
wolf in North America is the
vicious cultural war that puts
this beautiful predator species
— demonized by myth and
ignorance — in the middle of
a zero-sum game that
marginalizes efforts to
educate the public and
create consensus-based policies.

The Republican-controlled
Legislature’s zeal to appease
a vocal minority — even if i
t means circumventing voters
— only fuels that war.There is
no imperative — no pressing
public interest — to establish
a wolf hunt, certainly not against
the will of the majority of Michigan
voters, all of whom share an
equal stake in the preservation
of our natural resources. If
lawmakers give a lick about
the rights of its citizens and
the democratic process, they
will let voters decide this issue.

For years there has been talk around Jackson Hole of mountain lion “prides” that has run against the grain of the conventional belief that the large felines are a purely solitary species.

Perhaps, researchers with the Teton Cougar Project pondered, lions were teaming up to better defend themselves against wolves. Or maybe it was because elk and deer were falling off in numbers, forcing cougars to share finite food sources. Possibly, the biologists hypothesized, the social behavior was because the cats’ home ranges were near those of siblings or parents, and they were associating with their own blood.

It turns out that all of those hypotheses were flat wrong, Cougar Project team leader Mark Elbroch said.

“What’s really exciting about science — when it actually works — it’s that you can test these ideas,” Elbroch said. “I thought of [the study] as a wonderful example of science at work.”

Using GPS location data from 18 Jackson Hole-area cats and DNA tests from 68 animals, the Kelly-based Teton Cougar Project crunched the numbers and affirmed that local lions were social. But their associations with one another were not at all driven by more wolves, less food or the proximity of relatives.

The results were recently published in the academic journal Acta Ethologica.

“In fact,” Elbroch said, “what we found is that interactions occur between the least-related individuals most often.”

Some years back, two mother lions with kittens tracked by the Cougar Project — F51 and F61 — were seen “plainly hanging out” with each other consistently for months.

“Every time one of them made a kill, the other one would show up,” Elbroch said. “The assumption and the story was that they must be sisters.”

Instead genetics tests proved that the two female felines were as “unrelated as they could be,” he said.

Over the course of an eight-year period, the Cougar Project detected 92 “spatial associations” between GPS-collared cats, defined as any time when two animals were within 200 meters of each other for four hours or less. Another 190 “spatial overlaps” were documented, defined as a period when cats were within 200 meters of each other for between four hours and two weeks.

Male and female cats associated most of the time, followed by females rubbing shoulders with other females.

Males were tracked within 200 meters of one another just six times in eight years, a rate of association that was “statistically insignificant,” the Acta Ethologica paper said.

Associations were nearly seven times more frequent during the breeding season — February 1 to July 31 — compared with the rest of the year. That seasonal rise is not just because of male and female lions are canoodling, Elbroch said. It can also be attributed to fluctuations in the whereabouts of prey.

“This changes everything for mountain lions, including where they are.”

The Acta Ethologica paper uses the word “associations” rather than “interactions” because of some limitations that Elbroch is up front about.

The Cougar Project study relied only on hard data acquired from GPS collars and did not attempt to weave in observations made via remote video camera.

But an analysis of cougar relations from the video feed, which includes 50 adult cat interactions, is coming soon, Elbroch said.

“No one knows what these guys are doing,” he said. “It really creates a mythology.”“What I’m excited to do is address this mythology directly,” Elbroch said. “What are they doing? Are they fighting? Are they mating?”

Two Massachusetts Eastern Coyotes at their den site

Eastern Wolf in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, Canada

Aldo Leopold--3 quotes from his SAN COUNTY ALMANAC

"We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect."

Aldo Leopold

"A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise."

Aldo Leopold

''To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering."

Wildlife Rendezvous

Like so many conscientious hunters and anglers come to realize, good habitat with our full suite of predators and prey make for healthy and productive living............Teddy Roosevelt depicted at a "WILDLIFE RENDEZVOUS"

Recent Posts

Blog Disclaimer

This is a personal weblog. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer. In addition, my thoughts and opinions change from time to time…I consider this a necessary consequence of having an open mind. This blog is intended to provide a semi-permanent point in time snapshot and manifestation of my various thoughts and opinions, and as such any thoughts and opinions expressed within out-of-date posts may not be the same, nor even similar, to those I may hold today. All data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. Rick Meril and WWW.COYOTES-WOLVES-COUGARS.COM make no representations as to accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis.